Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Through Abstergo a company that creates a revolutionary technology that unlocks his genetic memories, Callum Lynch (Michael Fassbender) experiences the memories of his ancestor, Aguilar de Nerha (Aguilar Of Nerha), in 15th Century Spain. Callum discovers he is descended from a mysterious secret society, the Assassins and Templars, and amasses incredible knowledge and skills to take on the oppressive and powerful Templar organization in the present day.

Through a revolutionary technology that unlocks his genetic memories, Callum Lynch (Michael Fassbender) experiences the adventures of his ancestor, Aguilar, in 15th Century Spain. Callum discovers he is descended from a mysterious secret society, the Assassins, and amasses incredible knowledge and skills to take on the oppressive and powerful Templar organization in the present day. ASSASSIN'S CREED stars Academy Award (R) nominee Michael Fassbender (X-Men: Days of Future Past, 12 Years a Slave) and Academy Award winner Marion Cotillard (The Dark Knight Rises, La Vie en Rose). The film is directed by Justin Kurzel (Snowtown, Macbeth); produced by New Regency, Ubisoft Motion Pictures, DMC Films and Kennedy/Marshall; co-financed by RatPac Entertainment and Alpha Pictures; and distributed by 20th Century Fox. ASSASSIN'S CREED opens in theaters worldwide on December 21st, 2016.

Critics Consensus: Assassin's Creed is arguably better made (and certainly better cast) than most video game adaptations; unfortunately, the CGI-fueled end result still is still a joylessly overplotted slog.

Another much-beloved game franchise gets a chance on the big screen...

So, based on the very popular game franchise of the same title which began in 2007 and has since spawned 8 sequels as well as countless other splits and such Ubisoft in 2012 finally gets the ball rolling in trying to turn it into a movie. And four years later it hits the big screen but not to everyone's delight. Or maybe that should be to anyone's delight.

Anyway, I watched Assassin's Creed a little over a week ago since I had a couple of free passes to it. And I went in with the awareness that this wasn't a very good movie, so in a way, I sort of went because I was really curious about whether it was really that bad. So on to the likes and the dislikes.

How the story is far too often stuck in the dramatic rather than the action. Way too much exposition. So much so that the action when it comes feels like it's rushed and compressed. And when the action ends we're back to the drama and the talking which makes the film feel long and draggy.

The music. A little too loud sometimes.

The constant appearance of the eagle. Yes, it's in the game but only as a skill of the assassin, not a flying bird totem that appears every single time Cal goes into the Animus or when the story needs to go back in time to explain something.

Also assassin's who spend far more time fighting right out in the open instead of in the shadows where they got their reputation.

There's so much potential in this film that isn't realized but I guess that's not all that surprising. The problem that Assassin's Creed has is the same that all other game to movie adaptation attempts suffer from and that's one of perspective in my opinion. I've played games before and while playing have thought of how amazing that particular game would be if it became a movie but there's a problem with that. When you play a game you become part of that character and the story unfolds as you play that character through quests and puzzles. It's nowhere near the same when all you do is sit down and watch it unfold in front of you. When you play you are that character and you naturally become invested in his story and well-being through the many hours of the game. When you sit down to watch you only have a few minutes to get into the same territory and that only happens with a script that writes the character well. And even that comes into problematic territory when it comes to game adaptation, hardcore fans know the character too well while casual players of the game or those that are complete strangers to it need to be filled in on who he is so now you have to strike that balance and frankly speaking I don't think any game-to-movie adaptation has been successful.

Then there's the perpective of the film maker. What do you take from the movie? And, in most cases by the time there's interest in turning the franchise into a movie there's a lot of games and storylines and fans are no longer just casual fans but hardcore ones. So now there's a decision to be made, please the fans or please the general audience who may not know anything. Which ends up affecting the whole story which in this case ends up being way too talky and slow. And in this case I think the director that they decided to go with didn't help matters much. A brief look at Mr. Justin KurzelIMDB page and you'll notice that he mostly does dramas and not action films. And let's be honest here, most game players aren't looking to sit down and listen to their favourite characters talk. They play games to lose themselves in the quests and the action the story is incidental. If they were truly interested in the story they'd probably be reading books more than playing games. Maybe.

Anyway, as I sat through Assassin's Creed I thought of how much potential this movie really had. Half of me liked what I saw but the other half thought this could be soo much better. So I'm giving Assassin's Creed a decent 2.5 out of 5.

0
comments:

Post a Comment

About Me

[in-truh-duhk-shuh n]
noun
1.the act of introducing or the state of being introduced.
2.a formal personal presentation of one person to another or others.
3.a preliminary part, as of a book, musical composition, or the like, leading up to the main part.
4.an elementary treatise:an introduction to botany.
5.an act or instance of inserting.
6.something introduced.
Origin
Middle English
Latin
1350-1400
1350-1400; Middle English introduccion < Latin intrōductiōn- (stem of intrōductiō). See introduce, -tion
Synonyms
3. Introduction, foreword, preface refer to material given at the front of a book to explain or introduce it to the reader. A foreword is part of the front matter and is usually written by someone other than the author, often an authority on the subject of the book. A preface is the author's own statement, and often includes acknowledgments. It follows the foreword (if there is one) and is also part of the front matter. The introduction is always by the author. It may be extensive and is usually printed as part of the text.
Gollumpus (Grose 1811 Dictionary)
A large, clumsy fellow.
From The 1811 Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue, originally by Francis Grose.